|
Us nukes Original Source Link: (May no longer be active)
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-030902bombs.storyhttp://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-030902bombs.story
U.S. Works Up Plan for Using Nuclear Arms
Military: Administration, in a secret report, calls for a strategy against at least seven nations: China, Russia,
Iraq, Iran, North Korea, Libya and Syria.
By PAUL RICHTER, Times Staff Writer
WASHINGTON -- The Bush administration has directed the military to
prepare contingency plans to use nuclear weapons against at least seven
countries and to build smaller nuclear weapons for use in certain
battlefield situations, according to a classified Pentagon report obtained
by the Los Angeles Times.
The secret report, which was provided to Congress on Jan. 8, says the
Pentagon needs to be prepared to use nuclear weapons against China,
Russia, Iraq, North Korea, Iran, Libya and Syria. It says the weapons
could be used in three types of situations: against targets able to
withstand nonnuclear attack; in retaliation for attack with nuclear,
biological or chemical weapons; or "in the event of surprising military
developments."
A copy of the
report was
obtained by
defense analyst and
Times contributor
William Arkin. His column on the contents
appears in Sunday's editions.
Officials have long acknowledged that they had
detailed nuclear plans for an attack on Russia.
However, this "Nuclear Posture Review"
apparently marks the first time that an official
list of potential target countries has come to
light, analysts said. Some predicted the
disclosure would set off strong reactions from
governments of the target countries.
"This is dynamite," said Joseph Cirincione, a nuclear arms expert at the Carnegie Endowment for
International Peace in Washington. "I can imagine what these countries are going to be saying at the
U.N." Arms control advocates said the report's directives on development of smaller nuclear
weapons could signal that the Bush administration is more willing to overlook a long-standing taboo
against the use of nuclear weapons except as a last resort. They warned that such moves could
dangerously destabilize the world by encouraging other countries to believe that they, too, should
develop weapons.
"They're trying desperately to find new uses for nuclear weapons, when their uses should be limited
to deterrence," said John Isaacs, president of the Council for a Livable World. "This is very, very
dangerous talk . . . Dr. Strangelove is clearly still alive in the Pentagon."
But some conservative analysts insisted that the Pentagon must prepare for all possible
contingencies, especially now, when dozens of countries, and some terrorist groups, are engaged in
secret weapon development programs.
They argued that smaller weapons have an important deterrent role because many aggressors might
not believe that the U.S. forces would use multi-kiloton weapons that would wreak devastation on
surrounding territory and friendly populations.
"We need to have a credible deterrence against regimes involved in international terrorism and
development of weapons of mass destruction," said Jack Spencer, a defense analyst at the
conservative Heritage Foundation in Washington. He said the contents of the report did not surprise
him and represent "the right way to develop a nuclear posture for a post-Cold War world."
A spokesman for the Pentagon, Richard McGraw, declined to comment because the document is
classified.
Congress requested the reassessment of the U.S. nuclear posture in September 2000. The last such
review was conducted in 1994 by the Clinton administration. The new report, signed by Secretary
of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld, is now being used by the U.S. Strategic Command to prepare a
nuclear war plan.
Bush administration officials have publicly provided only sketchy details of the nuclear review. They
have publicly emphasized the parts of the policy suggesting that the administration wants to reduce
reliance on nuclear weapons.
Since the Clinton administration's review is also classified, no specific contrast can be drawn.
However, analysts portrayed this report as representing a break with earlier policy.
U.S. policymakers have generally indicated that the United States would not use nuclear weapons
against nonnuclear states unless they were allied with nuclear powers. They have left some ambiguity
about whether the United States would use nuclear weapons in retaliation after strikes with chemical
or nuclear weapons.
The report says the Pentagon should be prepared to use nuclear weapons in an Arab-Israeli
conflict, in a war between China and Taiwan, or in an attack from North Korea on the south. They
might also become necessary in an attack by Iraq on Israel or another neighbor, it said.
The report says Russia is no longer officially an "enemy." Yet it acknowledges that the huge Russian
arsenal, which includes about 6,000 deployed warheads and perhaps 10,000 smaller "theater"
nuclear weapons, remains of concern.
Pentagon officials have said publicly that they were studying the need to develop theater nuclear
weapons, designed for use against specific targets on a battlefield, but had not committed
themselves to that course.
Officials have often spoken of the advantages of using nuclear weapons to destroy the deep tunnel
and cave complexes that many regimes have been building, especially since the Persian Gulf War of
1991. Nuclear weapons give off powerful shock waves that can crush structures deep in the Earth,
they point out.
Officials argue that large nuclear arms have so many destructive side effects, from blast to heat and
radiation, that they become "self-deterring." They contend the Pentagon needs "full spectrum
deterrence"--that is, a full range of weapons that potential enemies believe might be used against
them.
The Pentagon was actively involved in planning for use of tactical nuclear weapons as recently as the
1970s. But it has moved away from them in the last two decades.
Analysts said the report's reference to "surprising military developments" referred to the Pentagon's
fears that a rogue regime or terrorist group might suddenly unleash a wholly unknown weapon that
was difficult to counter with the conventional U.S. arsenal.
The administration has proposed cutting the offensive nuclear arsenal by about two-thirds, to
between 1,700 and 2,200 missiles, within 10 years. Officials have also said they want to use
precision guided conventional munitions in some missions that might have previously been
accomplished with nuclear arms.
But critics said the report contradicts suggestions the Bush administration wants to cut the nuclear
role.
"This clearly makes nuclear weapons a tool for fighting a war, rather than deterring them," said
Cirincione.
|
|
